Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy for a Degenerative Meniscus Tear Is Not Cost Effective Compared With Placebo Surgery: An Economic Evaluation Based on the FIDELITY Trial Data.

BACKGROUND: In patients with a degenerative tear of the medial meniscus, recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews have shown no treatment benefit of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) over conservative treatment or placebo surgery. Yet, advocates of APM still argue that APM is cost effective. Giving advocates of APM their due, we note that there is evidence from the treatment of other musculoskeletal complaints to suggest that a treatment may prove cost effective even in the absence of improvements in efficacy outcomes, as it may lead to other benefits, such as diminished productivity loss and reduced costs, and so the question of cost effectiveness needs to be answered for APM. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does APM result in lower postoperative costs compared with placebo surgery? (2) Is APM cost-effective compared with placebo surgery? METHODS: One hundred forty-six adults aged 35 to 65 years with knee symptoms consistent with a degenerative medial meniscus tear and no knee osteoarthritis according to the American College of Rheumatology clinical criteria were randomized to APM (n = 70) or placebo surgery (n = 76). In the APM and placebo surgery groups, mean age was 52 ± 7 years and 52 ± 7 years, and 60% (42 of 70) and 62% (47 of 76) of participants were men, respectively. There were no between-group differences in baseline characteristics. In both groups, a standard diagnostic arthroscopy was first performed. Thereafter, in the APM group, the torn meniscus was trimmed to solid meniscus tissue, whereas in the placebo surgery group, APM was carefully mimicked but no resection of meniscal tissue was performed; as such, surgical costs were the same in both arms and were not included in the analyses. All patients received identical postoperative care including a graduated home-based exercise program. At the 2-year follow-up, two patients were lost to follow-up, both in the placebo surgery group. Cost effectiveness over the 2-year trial period was computed as incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) for improvements in quality-adjusted life years (QALY), using both the societal (primary) and healthcare system (secondary) perspectives. To be able to consider APM cost effective, the CEA analysis should yield a positive INMB value. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to assess uncertainty. Several one-way sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: APM did not deliver lower postoperative costs, nor did it convincingly improve quality of life scores when compared with placebo surgery. From a societal perspective, APM was associated with € 971 (95% CI -2013 to 4017) higher costs and 0.015 (95% CI -0.011 to 0.041) improved QALYs over 2-year follow-up compared with placebo surgery. Both differences were statistically inconclusive (a wide 95% CI that crossed the line of no difference). Using the conventional willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of € 35,000 per QALY, APM resulted in a negative INMB of € -460 (95% CI -3757 to 2698). In our analysis, APM would result in a positive INMB only when the WTP threshold rises to about € 65,000 per QALY. The wide 95% CIs suggests uncertain cost effectiveness irrespective of chosen WTP threshold. CONCLUSION: The results of this study lend further support to clinical practice guidelines recommending against the use of APM in patients with a degenerative meniscus tear. Given the robustness of existing evidence demonstrating no benefit or cost effectiveness of APM over nonsurgical treatment or placebo surgery, future research is unlikely to alter this conclusion.Level of Evidence Level III, economic analysis.

Prognosis of patients with post-Covid-19 condition: Prospective cohort cluster analysis at one year.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify clinically relevant clusters among patients with post-Covid-19 condition (PCC) and assess prognosis overall and within clusters. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients with PCC attending a rehabilitation clinic. We monitored patient reported outcome measures (PROMs): EuroHIS quality of life and symptoms. Unsupervised hierarchical cluster analyses were performed to identify clusters of patients with different quantity of symptoms, and symptoms presenting together. Preliminary findings on symptom prevalence and quality of life at 12 months are reported. RESULTS: Among 409 patients, 70.4% were women, with an average baseline of 20.3 (SD 6.8) symptoms. Three clusters emerged based on symptom quantity, labelled by the average number of symptoms at baseline: Cluster-11 (17% of all patients), Cluster-17 (35%), and Cluster-25 (48%). Multinomial logistic regression showed female sex, multiple comorbidities predicting more symptoms. Four symptom-based clusters were defined: fatigue and cognitive complaints; pain, trouble sleeping, palpitations and other symptoms; gastrointestinal symptoms; and emotion-related symptoms. Linear regression models showed that female sex, multiple comorbidities, anxiety, use of antidepressants, BMI and smoking were among the determinants of symptom clusters. In 12-month follow-up, symptom count decreased, and quality of life improved across all clusters, with 9% having good quality of life at baseline and 33% at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Four patient clusters based on symptoms were identified in the PCC cohort. Prognosis was favorable across all clusters, with symptom reduction and improved quality of life observed. Female sex, comorbidities, BMI, and mental-health related variables predicted higher symptom burden, suggesting multifactorial origins of PCC.

Effectiveness of a classification-based approach to low back pain in primary care - a benchmarking controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of classification-based approach for low back pain care in Finnish primary care. DESIGN: A benchmarking controlled trial design was used. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: Three primary healthcare areas and 654 low back pain patients with or without sciatica. METHODS: Classification-based care (using the STarT Back Tool) was implemented using organizational-, healthcare professional-, and patient-level interventions. The primary outcome was change in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, Physical Function (PROMIS PF-20) from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS: No difference was found between the intervention and control in change in PROMIS PF-20 over the 12-month follow-up (mean difference 0.33 confidence interval -2.27 to 2.9, p = 0.473). Low back pain-related healthcare use, imaging, and sick leave days were significantly lower in the intervention group. Reduction in intensity of low back pain appeared to be already achieved at the 3-month follow-up (mean difference -1.3, confidence interval -2.1 to -0.5) in the intervention group, while in the control group the same level of reduction was observed at 12 months (mean difference 0.7, confidence interval -0.2 to 1.5, treatment*time p = 0.003).  Conclusion: Although classification-based care did not appear to influence physical functioning, more rapid reductions in pain intensity and reductions in healthcare use and sick leave days were observed in the intervention group.

Surgery, Needle Fasciotomy, or Collagenase Injection for Dupuytren Contracture : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgery, needle fasciotomy, and collagenase injection are used to treat Dupuytren contracture. The treatment decision requires balancing initial morbidity and costs of surgery against its potential long-term benefits over needle fasciotomy and collagenase. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of surgery, needle fasciotomy, and collagenase injection at 3 months and 2 years (secondary time points of the trial). DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized, outcome assessor-blinded, superiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03192020). SETTING: 6 public hospitals in Finland. PARTICIPANTS: 302 persons with treatment-naive Dupuytren contracture (contracture angle <135°). INTERVENTION: Surgery (n = 101), needle fasciotomy (n = 101), or collagenase (n = 100). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the success rate, defined as greater than 50% contracture release and patients reaching the patient acceptable symptom state. Secondary outcomes included hand function, pain, quality of life, patient satisfaction, residual contracture angle, finger flexion, risk for retreatment, and serious adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 292 (97%) and 284 (94%) participants completed the 3-month and 2-year follow-ups. Success rates were similar at 3 months: 71% (95% CI, 62% to 80%) for surgery, 73% (CI, 64% to 82%) for needle fasciotomy, and 73% (CI, 64% to 82%) for collagenase. At 2 years, surgery had superior success rates compared with both needle fasciotomy (78% vs. 50%; adjusted risk difference [aRD], 0.30 [CI, 0.17 to 0.43]) and collagenase (78% vs. 65%; aRD, 0.13 [CI, 0.01 to 0.26]). Secondary analyses paralleled with the primary analysis. LIMITATION: Participants were not blinded. CONCLUSION: Initial outcomes are similar between the treatments, but at 2 years success rates were maintained in the surgery group but were lower with both needle fasciotomy and collagenase despite retreatments. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Research Council of Finland.

Measuring outcomes of rehabilitation among the elderly-a feasibility study.

A feasible system for measuring patient outcomes of rehabilitation is required for assessing the real-world cost-effectiveness of rehabilitation. This study aims to assess the feasibility of measuring outcomes of rehabilitation among elderly individuals with early-stage Alzheimer's. We used the principles of Design Science to construct a set of metrics consisting of standardized PROM (Patient-Reported Outcome Measure) questionnaires, clinician-reported measures, and observational measures of functioning. We used standardized questionnaires whenever possible to ensure the validity and reliability of the questionnaires. The set of metrics was piloted on 16 individuals living at home with regular home care services. After the pilot, we further refined the set of metrics based on relevance, sensitivity to change, and applicability. We found that measurement was feasible and we propose the final set of metrics as a minimum set, which could be further improved upon by addition of metrics relevant to each subgroup of elderly individuals. We also found that using self-reported questionnaires in this population is not without difficulties. We therefore suggest that the role of informal caregivers be considered, and that accessibility of outcome questionnaires be improved.

Prognosis of patients with long COVID symptoms: a protocol for a longitudinal cohort study at a primary care referred outpatient clinic in Helsinki, Finland.

INTRODUCTION: After COVID-19, many continue to experience persistent debilitating symptoms, that is, long COVID. Its most prevalent symptoms are chest pain, difficulties with breathing, painful muscles, ageusia or anosmia, tingling extremities and general tiredness. This paper describes the protocol of the Long COVID Cohort Study to assess the prognosis and prognostic determinants of patients with long COVID by implementing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) and clinical examinations during a 1-year follow-up. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective, single-site cohort study consisting of administering questionnaires and clinical examinations to adult patients referred to the Clinic for Long-Term Effects of COVID-19 at Helsinki University Hospital (Hospital district of Helsinki and Uusimaa). The referrals are from all healthcare units within HUS and other hospital districts during years 2021-2023. All admitted patients have had laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. The targeted study sample size is 500 participants. The questionnaires are administered at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months. The main outcome variables are the changes in self-reported functional abilities and quality of life. In addition, we will evaluate functional abilities at baseline using neurocognitive evaluation, a 6MWT and a measurement of hand grip strength. The Long COVID Cohort Study will form a quality register for the clinic and characterise the first systematic collection of PROMs, PREMs, questionnaire and clinical examinations related to long COVID in Finland. The Study belongs to a study consortium Long COVID-HORIZON-HLTH-2021-DISEASE-04 that aims to reveal the biomechanisms of long COVID. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Helsinki University Hospital research ethics committee board, ID HUS/1493/2021 on 6 March 2021. All study participants sign written informed consent for participation. The study findings will be reported for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05699512; Pre-results.

The Finnish spine register (FinSpine): development, design, validation and utility.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to develop a nationwide, computer-based, Spine Register (FinSpine) for monitoring surgical activity, quality of surgery, long-term outcomes, and effectiveness of treatment. In this paper, we describe our experiences in the development and implementation of the register. METHODS: The register was developed by a steering group, consisting of orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons from the whole country. We strived to develop a register which would be in active use by spine surgeons and enable collection of Patient Reported Outcome and Experience Measures (PROMs and PREMs) automatically and prospectively. We are actively promoting the use of the register in order to gain a nationwide coverage and achieve high response-rates from both surgeons and patients. RESULTS: The use of FinSpine started in 2016 and it has been granted continuous funding from the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare from the 1st of January 2023 onwards. Currently the register is used by 19/23 (83%) public hospitals and the use is expanding to private hospitals as well. The response-rate of surgeons is currently 80%. The response-rate of patients is on average 56% but reaches up to 90% in hospitals using register-coordinators. CONCLUSION: The use of FinSpine is increasing. By gaining a larger coverage and completeness, the data can be used for research purposes which we believe will influence decision making and ultimately improve the outcomes and quality of life of the patients. Comparison with other national spine registers is possible, since FinSpine includes similar baseline characteristics and outcome measures (e.g., ODI, EQ-5D, VAS).

Smoking cessation intervention prior to orthopedic surgery: A study protocol to determine patient outcomes and feasibility.

The aim of the study is to analyze the effect of smoking and smoking cessation on the incidence of complications among orthopedic and hand surgery patients, and to determine the feasibility of smoking cessation intervention, as well as factors predicting success in smoking cessation. Orthopedic and hand surgery patients will be invited to participate in the study, which will recruit 550 participants (at least 20% daily smokers). A participant will be defined as a daily smoker if he/she reports daily smoking and/or laboratory tests show active smoking. Data will be collected using a self-reported questionnaire and from medical records. Smokers will receive information about the benefits of smoking cessation and will be encouraged to quit. Medication or nicotine replacement therapy will be prescribed. Laboratory tests will be taken two weeks before and two weeks after surgery. Follow-up phone calls will be made at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The primary outcome is any complication, defined as a prolonged stay in hospital or any additional visit to or measure taken by a health service during the 12 months after surgery. Data on complications are mainly obtained from personal health records and from the information received at the follow-up; the rest of the data will be collected from the register of healthcare-associated infections. Secondary outcomes are the number and types of complications. The sample (n=550) was calculated to observe a 10% difference in complications between smokers and non-smokers (5% alpha level and 80% power), considering a 10% drop-out rate. Logistic regression and log-linear models will be used for data analyses.

Creating an inexpensive hospital-wide surgical complication register for performance monitoring: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Basic tools that measure a hospital's performance are required in order to benchmark or compare hospitals, but multispecialty institutional registries are rarely reported, and there is no consensus on their standard definitions and methodology. This study aimed to describe the setting up and first results of a hospital-wide surgical complication register that uses a minimal set of patient-related risk factors based on bedside data and produces outcomes data based on severity of complications. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: Perioperative data related to all adult surgical procedures in a tertiary referral centre in Finland for 3 years (2016-2018) were included in the study. Complications were recorded according to a modified Clavien-Dindo classification, and the preoperative risk factors were compiled based on the literature and coded as numerical measures. The associations of preoperative risk factors with postoperative complications were analysed using the χ2 test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: In total, 19 158 operations were performed between 2016 and 2018. Data on complications (Clavien 0-9) were recorded for 4529 surgical patients (23.6%), and 779 complications were reported (Clavien 1-9), leading to an overall complication rate of 17.2%. Of these, 4.6% were graded as major (Clavien 4-7). Patient-related risk factors with the strongest association with complications were growing American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System score (p<0.001), growing Charlson Index (p<0.001), poor nutritional status (Nutritional Risk Screening 2002), p=0.041) and urgency of surgery (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We describe an inexpensive hospital-wide surgical complication monitoring system that can produce valid numerical data for monitoring risk-adjusted surgical quality. The results showed that only a few patient-related risk factors were sufficient to account for the case mix.

Incidence and risk factors of spinal cord stimulation for persistent or recurrent pain after lumbar spine surgery: a population-based study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to elucidate the incidence of and independent risk factors for spinal cord stimulator implantations for patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: The PERFormance, Effectiveness, and Cost of Treatment (PERFECT) episodes database, which was established for selected diseases and procedures in Finland, includes all patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery for degenerative spine conditions or spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in Finland from 1986 to 2018. The data on age, sex, hospital diagnoses, surgical procedures, and causes of death were imported from the Finnish national registers into the PERFECT database. RESULTS: Between 1986 and 2018, 157,824 patients had their first lumbar spine procedure and for 1769 (1.1%) of them, a subsequent SCS procedure was observed during the follow-up. The cumulative incidence of SCS for persistent or recurrent pain after lumbar disk herniation, spinal stenosis, degenerative disk disease, and spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis surgery at 15 years was 1.2%, 1.0%, 2.7%, and 2.6% respectively. At 15 years, the cumulative incidence of SCS for persistent or recurrent pain after lumbar spine surgery after five or more lumbar spinal operations was 11.9%. CONCLUSION: Repeated surgery was the most prominent significant risk factor for SCS for persistent or recurrent pain after lumbar spine surgery. The risk of SCS for persistent or recurrent pain after lumbar spine surgery increases significantly along with the number of lumbar spine procedures. When considering repeated lumbar spine surgery, careful evaluation of treatment options should take place to ensure good patient outcomes.

A comprehensive model for measuring real-life cost-effectiveness in eyecare: automation in care and evaluation of system (aces-rwm™).

This paper describes a holistic, yet simple and comprehensible, ecosystem model to deal with multiple and complex challenges in eyecare. It aims at producing the best possible wellbeing and eyesight with the available resources. When targeting to improve the real-world cost-effectiveness, what gets done in everyday practice needs be measured routinely, efficiently and unselectively. Collection of all real-world data of all patients will enable evaluation and comparison of eyecare systems and departments between themselves nationally and internationally. The concept advocates a strategy to optimize real-life effectiveness, sustainability and outcomes of the service delivery in ophthalmology. The model consists of three components: (1) resource-governing principles (i.e., to deal with increasing demand and limited resources), (2) real-world monitoring (i.e., to collect structured real-world data utilizing automation and visualization of clinical parameters, health-related quality of life and costs), and (3) digital innovation strategy (i.e., to evaluate and benchmark real-world outcomes and cost-effectiveness). The core value and strength of the model lies in the consensus and collaboration of all Finnish university eye clinics to collect and evaluate the uniformly structured real-world outcomes data. In addition to ophthalmology, the approach is adaptable to any medical discipline to efficiently generate real-world insights and resilience in health systems.

Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain has been the leading cause of disability globally for at least the past three decades and results in enormous direct healthcare and lost productivity costs. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess the impact of exercise treatment on pain and functional limitations in adults with chronic non-specific low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care, placebo and other conservative treatments. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which includes the Cochrane Back and Neck trials register), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, and trials registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), and conducted citation searching of relevant systematic reviews to identify additional studies. The review includes data for trials identified in searches up to 27 April 2018. All eligible trials have been identified through searches to 7 December 2020, but have not yet been extracted; these trials will be integrated in the next update. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that assessed exercise treatment compared to no treatment, usual care, placebo or other conservative treatment on the outcomes of pain or functional limitations for a population of adult participants with chronic non-specific low back pain of more than 12 weeks' duration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors screened and assessed studies independently, with consensus. We extracted outcome data using electronic databases; pain and functional limitations outcomes were re-scaled to 0 to 100 points for meta-analyses where 0 is no pain or functional limitations. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool and used GRADE to evaluate the overall certainty of the evidence. When required, we contacted study authors to obtain missing data. To interpret meta-analysis results, we considered a 15-point difference in pain and a 10-point difference in functional limitations outcomes to be clinically important for the primary comparison of exercise versus no treatment, usual care or placebo. MAIN RESULTS: We included 249 trials of exercise treatment, including studies conducted in Europe (122 studies), Asia (38 studies), North America (33 studies), and the Middle East (24 studies). Sixty-one per cent of studies (151 trials) examined the effectiveness of two or more different types of exercise treatment, and 57% (142 trials) compared exercise treatment to a non-exercise comparison treatment. Study participants had a mean age of 43.7 years and, on average, 59% of study populations were female. Most of the trials were judged to be at risk of bias, including 79% at risk of performance bias due to difficulty blinding exercise treatments. We found moderate-certainty evidence that exercise treatment is more effective for treatment of chronic low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo comparisons for pain outcomes at earliest follow-up (MD -15.2, 95% CI -18.3 to -12.2), a clinically important difference. Certainty of evidence was downgraded mainly due to heterogeneity. For the same comparison, there was moderate-certainty evidence for functional limitations outcomes (MD -6.8 (95% CI -8.3 to -5.3); this finding did not meet our prespecified threshold for minimal clinically important difference. Certainty of evidence was downgraded mainly due to some evidence of publication bias.  Compared to all other investigated conservative treatments, exercise treatment was found to have improved pain (MD -9.1, 95% CI -12.6 to -5.6) and functional limitations outcomes (MD -4.1, 95% CI -6.0 to -2.2). These effects did not meet our prespecified threshold for clinically important difference. Subgroup analysis of pain outcomes suggested that exercise treatment is probably more effective than education alone (MD -12.2, 95% CI -19.4 to -5.0) or non-exercise physical therapy (MD -10.4, 95% CI -15.2 to -5.6), but with no differences observed for manual therapy (MD 1.0, 95% CI -3.1 to 5.1). In studies that reported adverse effects (86 studies), one or more adverse effects were reported in 37 of 112 exercise groups (33%) and 12 of 42 comparison groups (29%). Twelve included studies reported measuring adverse effects in a systematic way, with a median of 0.14 (IQR 0.01 to 0.57) per participant in the exercise groups (mostly minor harms, e.g. muscle soreness), and 0.12 (IQR 0.02 to 0.32) in comparison groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found moderate-certainty evidence that exercise is probably effective for treatment of chronic low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo for pain. The observed treatment effect for the exercise compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo comparisons is small for functional limitations, not meeting our threshold for minimal clinically important difference. We also found exercise to have improved pain (low-certainty evidence) and functional limitations outcomes (moderate-certainty evidence) compared to other conservative treatments; however, these effects were small and not clinically important when considering all comparisons together. Subgroup analysis suggested that exercise treatment is probably more effective than advice or education alone, or electrotherapy, but with no differences observed for manual therapy treatments.

Patient education booklet to support evidence-based low back pain care in primary care - a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate imaging and low-value care for low back pain (LBP) are common. A new patient-education booklet was created to overcome identified barriers to the delivery of recommended care, including the use of inappropriate imaging. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of this booklet as part of primary care for LBP patients in comparison to usual care. METHODS: A cluster-randomized trial was performed. The intervention involved providing practitioners with the new patient-education booklet and a 30-min training session on its use. The booklet was provided during the clinical consult to all consenting LBP patients in the intervention group. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients presenting with LBP who underwent imaging examinations during the first three months of follow-up and PROMIS PF-20 (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, 20-item physical functioning short form) change between baseline and three-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes, including sick leave and imaging examinations at 12 months, were investigated. Logistic regression using GEE-estimation was used for dichotomous outcomes, Poisson regression using GEE-estimation for count outcomes, and linear mixed models for continuous outcomes. RESULTS: Using the patient education booklet appeared to substantially reduce the proportion of LBP patients who underwent an imaging examination at three months, but the result was not statistically significant (OR 0.57, 95% confidence interval (Cl) 0.27 to 1.22). At 12 months, the effect was slightly larger and statistically significant (OR 0.50, 95%Cl 0.30 to 0.83, p = 0.008). No difference was observed in the PROMIS PF-20 T-score change between baseline and 3 months or 12 months (p = 0.365 and p = 0.923, respectively). The number of sick leave days in the intervention group was less than that in the control group at 3 months (RR 0.47, 95%Cl 0.26 to 0.83, p = 0.010) and at 12 months (RR 0.36, 95%Cl 0.18 to 0.72, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: The booklet appeared to be effective in reducing the proportion of LBP patients who underwent imaging examinations over 12 months. The intervention had no discernible effect on the PROMIS PF20 T-score change. The number of sick leave days was substantially lower in the intervention group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN14389368 , Registered 4 April 2019-Retrospectively registered.

Applicability of evidence from randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews to clinical practice: A conceptual review.

BACKGROUND: The value of randomized controlled trials is dependent on the applicability of their findings to clinical decision-making. The aim of this study is to determine a definition and principles for the applicability of evidence from randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews. METHODS: This narrative review searched studies from PubMed and Web of Science databases using Cochrane Collaboration's Qualitative Evidence Syntheses guidance. Empirical studies were excluded. Based on the included studies, a definition for the concept and propositions for principles of applicability were formulated. RESULTS: A definition and 11 propositions are presented, 6 propositions having additional sub-propositions. Low risk of bias, ability to answer to specific questions, documentation of the details of how randomized controlled trials turned out, reporting of favourable and adverse outcomes, and systematic comparison of randomized controlled trials and clinical data were considered important. Biomedical randomized controlled trials have the widest applicability, while heterogeneity in study characteristics, human perception, behaviour, environmental, equity factors, and health economic issues lessen applicability. Obtaining applicable evidence is a gradual process. Methodological and substance expertise is necessary for assessing applicability. DISCUSSION: A definition of applicability and requirements for applicable evidence from randomized controlled trials to real-world contexts are presented. Propositions are suggested for any assessment of applicability of findings from randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Effectiveness of training in guideline-oriented biopsychosocial management of low-back pain in occupational health services - a cluster randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of brief training in the guideline-oriented biopsychosocial management of low-back pain (LBP) in occupational health services using a cluster-randomized design. A small sample of physiotherapists and physicians from the intervention units (N=12) were given three- to seven-day training focusing on the biopsychosocial management of LBP, while professionals in the control units (N=15) received no such training. METHODS: Eligible patients with LBP, with or without radicular pain, aged 18-65, were invited to participate. A web-based questionnaire was sent to all recruited patients at baseline, three months and one year. The primary outcome measure was disability (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) over one year. Between-group differences were analyzed using linear and generalized linear mixed models adjusted for baseline-response delay as well as variables showing between-group imbalance at baseline. RESULTS: The final study sample comprised 234 and 81 patients in the intervention and control groups, respectively at baseline, and 137 and 47 patients, respectively, at one year. At baseline, the mean duration of pain was longer in the intervention group (P=0.017), and pain-related fear concerning physical activity was lower (P=0.012). We observed no significant difference between the groups' primary outcome measure (adjusted one-year mean difference in the ODI: 2.3; 95% confidence interval -1.0-5.7; P=0.175) or most secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Brief training in guideline-oriented biopsychosocial management of LBP for occupational health professionals did not appear to be effective in reducing patients' symptom over one-year follow-up compared to treatment as usual.

Evaluation of training in guideline-oriented biopsychosocial management of low back pain in occupational health services: Protocol of a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: To prevent low back pain (LBP) from developing into a prolonged disabling condition, clinical guidelines advocate early stage assessment, risk-screening, and tailored interventions. Occupational health services recommend guideline-oriented biopsychosocial screening and individualized assessment and management. However, it is not known whether training a limited number of health care professionals improves the management process. The primary objective of this study is to investigate whether training in the biopsychosocial practice model is effective in reducing disability. Furthermore, we aim to evaluate health-economic impacts of the training intervention in comparison to usual medical care. METHODS: The occupational health service units will be allocated into a training or control arm in a two-arm cluster randomized controlled design. The training of occupational physiotherapists and physicians will include the assessment of pain-related psychosocial factors using the STarT Back Tool and the short version of the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire, the use of an evidence-based patient education booklet as part of the management of LBP, and tailored individualized management of LBP according to risk stratification. The control units will receive no training. The study population will include patients aged 18-65 with nonspecific LBP. The primary outcome is a patient-reported Oswestry Disability Index from baseline to 12 months. By estimating group differences over time, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of the training intervention in comparison to usual medical care, and to undertake an economic evaluation using individual patients' health care records (participant-level data) and the participating units' registries (cluster-level data). In addition, through interviews and questionnaires, we will explore the health care professionals' conceptions of the adoption of, the barriers to, and the facilitators of the implementation of the practice model. DISCUSSION: The evaluation of training in the guideline-oriented biopsychosocial management of LBP in occupational health services is justified because LBP represents an enormous burden in terms of work disability.

Occurrence, Risk Factors, and Time Trends for Late Reoperations due to Degenerative Cervical Spine Disease: A Finnish National Register Study of 19 377 Patients Operated on Between 1999 and 2015.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for degenerative cervical spine disease has escalated since the 1990s. Fusion has become the mainstay of surgery despite concerns regarding adjacent segment degeneration. The patient-specific trends in reoperations have not been studied previously. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the occurrence, risk factors, and trends in reoperations in a long-term follow-up of all the patients operated for degenerative cervical spine disease in Finland between 1999 and 2015. METHODS: The patients were retrospectively identified from the Hospital Discharge Registry. Reoperations were traced individually; only reoperations occurring >365 d after the primary operation were included. Time trends in reoperations and the risk factors were analyzed by regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 19 377 identified patients, 9.2% underwent a late reoperation at a median of 3.6 yr after the primary operation. The annual risk of reoperation was 2.4% at 2 yr, 6.6% at 5 yr, 11.1% at 10 yr, and 14.2% at 15 yr. Seventy-five percent of the late reoperations occurred within 6.5 yr of the primary operation. Foraminal stenosis, the anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) technique, male gender, weak opiate use, and young age were the most important risk factors for reoperation. There was no increase in the risk of reoperations over the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: The risk of reoperation was stable between 1999 and 2015. The reoperation risk was highest during the first 6 postoperative years and then declined. Patients with foraminal stenosis had the highest risk of reoperation, especially when ACDF was performed.

Subacromial decompression versus diagnostic arthroscopy for shoulder impingement: a 5-year follow-up of a randomised, placebo surgery controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term efficacy of arthroscopic subacromial decompression (ASD) by comparing it with diagnostic arthroscopy (primary comparison), a placebo surgical intervention, and with a non-operative alternative, exercise therapy (secondary comparison). METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, three group, randomised, controlled superiority trial. We included 210 patients aged 35-65 years, who had symptoms consistent with shoulder impingement syndrome for more than 3 months. 175 participants (83%) completed the 5 years follow-up. Patient enrolment began on 1 February 2005 and the 5-year follow-up was completed by 10 October 2018. The two primary outcomes were shoulder pain at rest and on arm activity measured with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Minimally important difference (MID) was set at 15. We used a mixed-model repeated measurements analysis of variance with participant as a random factor, the baseline value as a covariate and assuming a covariance structure with compound symmetry. RESULTS: In the primary intention to treat analysis (ASD vs diagnostic arthroscopy), there were no between-group differences that exceeded the MID for the primary outcomes at 5 years: the mean difference between groups (ASD minus diagnostic arthroscopy) in pain VAS were -2.0 (95% CI -8.5 to 4.6; p=0.56) at rest and -8.0 (-17.3 to 1.3; p=0.093) on arm activity. There were no between-group differences in the secondary outcomes or adverse events that exceeded the MID. In our secondary comparison (ASD vs exercise therapy), the mean differences between groups (ASD minus exercise therapy) in pain VAS were 1.0 (-5.6 to 7.6; p=0.77) at rest and -3.9 (-12.8 to 5.1; p=0.40) on arm activity. There were no significant between-group differences for the secondary outcomes or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: ASD provided no benefit over diagnostic arthroscopy (or exercise therapy) at 5 years for patients with shoulder impingement syndrome.

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for a degenerative meniscus tear: a 5 year follow-up of the placebo-surgery controlled FIDELITY (Finnish Degenerative Meniscus Lesion Study) trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term effects of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) on the development of radiographic knee osteoarthritis, and on knee symptoms and function, at 5 years follow-up. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised, participant- and outcome assessor-blinded, placebo-surgery controlled trial. SETTING: Orthopaedic departments in five public hospitals in Finland. PARTICIPANTS: 146 adults, mean age 52 years (range 35-65 years), with knee symptoms consistent with degenerative medial meniscus tear verified by MRI scan and arthroscopically, and no clinical signs of knee osteoarthritis were randomised. INTERVENTIONS: APM or placebo surgery (diagnostic knee arthroscopy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We used two indices of radiographic knee osteoarthritis (increase in Kellgren and Lawrence grade ≥1, and increase in Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) atlas radiographic joint space narrowing and osteophyte sum score, respectively), and three validated patient-relevant measures of knee symptoms and function (Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET), Lysholm, and knee pain after exercise using a numerical rating scale). RESULTS: There was a consistent, slightly greater risk for progression of radiographic knee osteoarthritis in the APM group as compared with the placebo surgery group (adjusted absolute risk difference in increase in Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥1 of 13%, 95% CI -2% to 28%; adjusted absolute mean difference in OARSI sum score 0.7, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.3). There were no relevant between-group differences in the three patient-reported outcomes: adjusted absolute mean differences (APM vs placebo surgery), -1.7 (95% CI -7.7 to 4.3) in WOMET, -2.1 (95% CI -6.8 to 2.6) in Lysholm knee score, and -0.04 (95% CI -0.81 to 0.72) in knee pain after exercise, respectively. The corresponding adjusted absolute risk difference in the presence of mechanical symptoms was 18% (95% CI 5% to 31%); there were more symptoms reported in the APM group. All other secondary outcomes comparisons were similar. CONCLUSIONS: APM was associated with a slightly increased risk of developing radiographic knee osteoarthritis and no concomitant benefit in patient-relevant outcomes, at 5 years after surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01052233 and NCT00549172).